I've previously been unaware of the ouvre of MSNBC's Tucker Carlson, but he recently interviewed Gerri Peev, the Scotsman journalist responsible for breaking the Hillary `monster' story which resulted in the resignation of Obama adviser Samantha Powers.Now, the debate over whether Gerri Peev (I love the name) should have allowed Samantha Powers to retract the `monster' comment, claiming it was off the record, when no off-the-record parameters had been set at the outset of the interview, is I think a matter of cultural differences between British and US journalists. Ms Peev was working to one set of rules, and Ms Powers was working to another. Situations like that are always a car-crash waiting to happen.But I really do have to take exception with Tucker Carlson. His question, "Since journalistic standards in Great Britain are so much dramatically lower than they are here, it's a little much being lectured on journalistic ethics by a reporter from The Scotsman," really got my back up. I can't claim to be The Scotsman's greatest ally, but dammit, this overpaid, overcoiffed, smug berk has no right to say that about my trade. I love American journalism - some of the mightiest writing in the business has come from across the Pond - but I don't consider Tucker Carlson a worthy commentator. On the basis of this, the man's an idiot.You can watch the whole exchange (and a coda in which another guest congratulates Tucker Carlson) here. I'll grant you, Gerri Peev doesn't come out of it entirely whiter than white - she seems to have omitted to ask some fairly obvious follow-up questions. But really, the affrontery of the man.I think I'm going to be keeping an eye on Tucker Carlson, just to check on the quality of his journalism...